I see how it is important to have Fox News keep us infromed. I was under the impression that there were security threats and protests in 20 other countries that day with diplomats being killed in other capitals. Clearly only Libya had anything going on that day based on the article so I was misinfromed by the gotcha-media.

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears:What in the holy blue f*ck is the GOAL here? What do you WANT? Tell me what you need us to tell you? What will make you happy?

As with all extortion, there is no higher principle than $$$$. Hagel is going to slash the military budget. They was a SOD who will hand the military a blank check of taxpayer money, that will "trickle down" to their defense contractor lobbyists which will "trickle down" to some all inclusive resort getaways and PAC funding for politicians who play ball.

Imagine the questions that would have come: What did Obama do through the long, bloody night? Whom did he talk to? When did he learn that Stevens was dead?

The president's only instructions, Panetta said, were, "Do whatever you need to do," though he left the details "up to us."

It would be nice to know what Obama did during the nearly 11 hours from the start of the first attack until that plane left Libya, but in truth, we know enough to understand the meaning. His detachment during a terrorist attack was a shameful dereliction of duty.

Had he been a military officer, he would face charges. If he were George Bush, he would face ridicule and condemnation, at the least.

SkinnyHead:So when that 3AM phone call came in, nobody answered. Well that comes as no surprise.

Actually, the person who would have made that phone call was laid off a few months prior. Turns out the House wanted to cut some spending to put a slight dent in the deficit so as to look like they were making a difference, and they cut some money from the State Department's budget, resulting in some job losses. Don't worry, though, it was just some dumb security jobs that embassies don't even need, right? Good job on that deficit reduction! And all the jobs!

randomjsa:Being completely disengaged while a disaster was happening then being so concerned about it that you run off to a fund raiser the next day... Then lie about it for two weeks after the fact...

What possible benefit could the White House derive from "lying" about this thing for two weeks?

If it was a coverup, why did the correction come from the administration instead of from some whistle-blower or investigative reporter? And, if was a coverup, why didn't the administration keep the matter covered up beyond an important milestone, like, say, the presidential election?

The right wingnut conspiracy theories about this issue make no more sense than the birther conspiracies...and, maybe that's the problem: birthers and Benghazi-ers are pretty stupid people, generally speaking.

Imagine the questions that would have come: What did Obama do through the long, bloody night? Whom did he talk to? When did he learn that Stevens was dead?

The president's only instructions, Panetta said, were, "Do whatever you need to do," though he left the details "up to us."

It would be nice to know what Obama did during the nearly 11 hours from the start of the first attack until that plane left Libya, but in truth, we know enough to understand the meaning. His detachment during a terrorist attack was a shameful dereliction of duty.

Had he been a military officer, he would face charges. If he were George Bush, he would face ridicule and condemnation, at the least.

He's not a general, operational planning is not the presidents job.

His job is to say yes or no, when a plan is laid before him. That's it. Everything else is left to people who plan stuff like this for a living.

randomjsa:Being completely disengaged while a disaster was happening then being so concerned about it that you run off to a fund raiser the next day... Then lie about it for two weeks after the fact...

Remember; these people wouldn't be happy about ANY outcome. If Obama micromanaged the situation they would hate him for it. If he was hands off and let the chain of command handle it they would hate him for it.

born_yesterday:Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: What in the holy blue f*ck is the GOAL here? What do you WANT? Tell me what you need us to tell you? What will make you happy?

I don't even think they know anymore.

It's like a dog that caught its tail months ago and has finally chewed its way into its own asshole. They're neck-deep in their own sh*t, their ass hurts, and they can't remember why they were so pissed about the tail to begin with.

randomjsa:Being completely disengaged while a disaster was happening then being so concerned about it that you run off to a fund raiser the next day... Then lie about it for two weeks after the fact...

randomjsa:Being completely disengaged while a disaster was happening then being so concerned about it that you run off to a fund raiser the next day... Then lie about it for two weeks after the fact...

Yeah no reason to ask questions here.

Is Going-to-a-Fundraiser-While-the-Intelligence-Community-Gathers-Informa tion-Instead-of-Using-Obama's-Time-Machine-to-Unkill-4-Americans a scandal yet?

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears:What in the holy blue f*ck is the GOAL here? What do you WANT? Tell me what you need us to tell you? What will make you happy?

It is like when the police need to convict someone for a crime but have no suspect, so they detain an innocent person and interrogate them until they confess.It is like either the Republicans hopes that happens, or they can catch Obama lying about a blowjob during the interrogation.

randomjsa:Being completely disengaged while a disaster was happening then being so concerned about it that you run off to a fund raiser the next day... Then lie about it for two weeks after the fact...

Yeah no reason to ask questions here.

What does Bush's behavior immediately following Katrina have to do with Benghazi?

lilbjorn:Because it's UTTERLY FARKING STUPID to go around broadcasting details of how the State Department, CIA, and military respond to terrorist situations.

I think you meant: didn't respond.

And what is particularly interesting is the key lie (that the attack spontaneously arose out of an anti-video protest) had nothing to do with "responding to terrorist situations." But Obama was busy, so any old lie in a crisis, a re-election crisis.

Conservative media are pushing selectively cropped footage of Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and General Martin Dempsey as evidence that President Obama was "AWOL" the night of the Benghazi attack. In reality, Panetta and Dempsey emphasized that Obama's involvement was appropriate and that the White House was kept "well-informed" throughout the night.

...

Both The Weekly Standard and Fox News' video cuts off just as Army General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who was also testifying, corrected Ayotte as to the White House's focus the night of the Benghazi attack. Gen. Dempsey attested to the fact that although Obama did not personally follow up with him, Obama's staff was engaged "pretty constantly through the period, which is the way it would normally work."

...

Panetta also testified to the fact that Obama was in contact with military officials and was "well-informed" during the attack on our consulate, another part of the testimony that was ignored by conservative media. Special Report aired a portion of Sen. Lindsey Graham's questioning, but cut off Panetta's defense of Obama.

Because you assholes derped it up over Benghazi, birth certificates, and all manner of meaningless non-issues. You went to the well 1 too many times, and in doing so you just created a public image of Obama as a "teflon" president who can do no wrong.